The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery introduced the report and stated that the project was being brought forward in two phases: Phase 1 being the new station, which was in detailed design phase and construction stage; and the Phase 2 being the Transport Hub, which was in concept design stage. He stated that a contractor for Phase 1 had been appointed in March 2022 and the team were currently negotiating the final sign-off of the contract, which would hopefully be completed next week. He added that there was currently a one- or two-month delay to works starting on the site due to the contract execution issues, but was hopeful that the contractors could offset this delay as the detailed design phase continued. The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery added that the South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP), who are one of the funders, had asked for an updated business case demonstrating value for money, which had been issued in draft with the aim that it be endorsed by SELEP in September. He stated that Part 2 of the business case concerning Phase 2 would describe how the concept design would be reviewed in partnership with stakeholders to ensure local businesses, such as the port, had their transport needs met and property development opportunities explored. He stated that construction of Phase 2 of the project could not begin until Phase 1 was completed, so felt that now was the optimal time to undertake a re-evaluation.

The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery explained that the contractors price met the Phase 1 budget envelope, and the team were working on a fixed cost contract, although this was currently being discussed with contractors due to the delayed execution and ongoing inflation issues. He highlighted Table 3.10 of the report which outlined the key milestones in the scheme, and explained that once the contract had been signed, activity such as enabling works could begin onsite. He added that 3.11 of the report outlined the key risks, mitigation, and opportunities for the scheme, and highlighted that Network Rail were involved in the scheme in an Asset Protection capacity and were an integral part of the design team, which meant that ideas such as reduced piling for platforms through value engineering could be progressed.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and asked if the late contract signing would influence the construction start date. The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery stated that the effect of the late contract signing would be understood when the contract had been signed and the contractors programme was submitted. Councillor Allen felt that the project had taken a long time, but felt pleased that it seemed to be moving forward. He asked if the project could still be delivered within the original budget envelope, as the detailed design had been changed. The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery felt confident that Phase 1 of the project could be delivered within the current budget envelope as there was risk tolerance allowed for. He stated that the team would be looking at additional funding for Phase 2 of the project to reflect opportunity to deliver greater benefits.

Councillor Watson asked how much the contract would be signed for. She queried if the updated business case would increase the budget envelope and asked for the level of risk tolerance. The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery stated that as contract negotiations were ongoing, he should not release the contract value information into the public realm. He added that as the cost for the project had increased, SELEP had asked additional questions regarding value for money, which the team were providing. He commented that the current budget was approximately £29million, and an adequate risk tolerance was included in this for Phase 1 construction. Councillor Watson asked if a report on the Stanford-le-Hope Interchange project be brought to every Committee meeting. Councillor Raper highlighted section 3.4 of the report and asked how feedback on the project had been collected. The Interim Assistant Director Regeneration and Place Delivery replied that a steering group had been set up for the project which included resident representatives and stakeholders such as, SELEP, the Port of London and Network Rail, who regularly provided project feedback.

RESOLVED:

1. That the Committee noted and commented on the information provided relating to the Stanford-le-Hope Interchange project.